Does having talent mean you should work hard to do justice to it? | Hacker News Reader

Does having talent mean you should work hard to do justice to it?

I have seen many people who are extremely talented and hence, face undue pressure to work hard and do justice to their talent. The way society looks at them is that since you are talented, it is your moral obligation to work hard and achieve success in your life.

Do you think this is justifiable? I guess an individual should not judged if they want to live a normal life, despite being immensely talented.

I follow cricket a lot and example of Vinod Kambli come to my mind. Similar story (although Rohit Sharma coped well with these expectations): https://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1397584/the-burdens-of-being-rohit-sharma

View on HN

No. There's nothing inherently good about having talent. It's about what the results are from applying the set of various talents you possess.

It could be that the thing that's your third proficiency brings about much more good when applied in earnest than your first proficiency. In the context of your cricket player, they could also be good at advocating for regenerative agriculture in villages full of subsistence farmers. Since in reality you're allowed to apply multiple talents at once, perhaps gaining fame in cricket would make their voice louder and more compelling, thus leading to even better outcomes in regenerative agriculture.

The focus on achievement is of course dominated by those who believe achievement is morally good per se. When it comes to sports these people are mostly selfish fanatics who just want to see something exciting. Occasionally good things can come out of that effort but usually the effects are indirect, e.g., inspiring future generations to try their best or building a platform to tackle more important issues.

Yes, but if one has a particular talent, is it justified for us (society as a whole) to exert pressure on that individual to utilize their talent to cause betterment of the society?

Should results for the whole society matter more than results for that specific individual?

Well, we do live in a society, and on the whole that person has benefited more from society than vice versa, so... yes, it seems only fair that that moral obligation is present.

What if one's talents are not constructive, or not currently socially acceptable?

"Vlad the Unwashed" was once revered for his ability to slaughter Unbelievers, but now we prefer to demonetize them instead, and Vlad's fans keep quiet lest they be similarly judged.

Well, that's one way to look at it. I guess if the talents are not (currently) socially acceptable, it seems to be perfectly fine (or even at times desirable) to not utilize them properly

I think that kind of thinking leads to a lot of unhappines and burnout to many of talented & gifted people. But I was thinking this more in the context of academics and careers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com